Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n according_a bishop_n church_n 2,848 5 4.3599 3 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A62255 Rome's conviction, or, A vindication of the original institution of Christianity in opposition to the many usurpations of the Church of Rome, and their frequent violation of divine right : cleerly evinced by arguments drawn from their own principles, and undeniable matter of fact / by John Savage ... Savage, J. (John), 1645-1721. 1683 (1683) Wing S769; ESTC R34022 148,491 472

There are 9 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

as belongs to it to produce its effect But in this case the power of Order is no Physical but a Moral effect and in all Ordinations it is given by Christ alone ad exigentiam Ordinationis by a determination which proceeds from the Ordination by vertue of Divine Institution for it is Christ alone that impowers the Ordained validly to exercise the Functions of his Order which is but a Moral Power whose immediate cause is not the Ordainer but only Christ thereunto determin'd by the Ordination which doth very much facilitate and confirm the foresaid Doctrine A Third Proofe is drawn from an acknowledged Principle of those of Rome who after a vacancy when a new Pope is chosen the Cardinals in the Conclave only concur to make the Election Canonical which being done all the Power they have cannot communicate to the new elected Pope that Universal Jurisdiction over all the Church which they pretend to because they have no such Jurisdiction in themselves every Bishop and Cardinal being confined within the limits of his own Diocess and one Bishop cannot extend his Jurisdiction to the Subjects of another Diocess From whence then doth the Pope receive his pretended Universal Jurisdiction Here they must of necessity have recourse to the Supreame Lord of the Church which is Christ himself for the obtaining this Jurisdiction for their new Pope which neither they nor their Canonical Election can effect for this Election is only a Condition not the Cause of such an illimited Jurisdiction so that Christ alone is the only cause of this Pretended Papal Jurisdiction Why then in like case when the Ordination is compleated in foro externo and no error committed in foro interno Why I say in this case should not Christ in like manner confer to the Ordained the Spiritual Power of Order for though the Ordination be never so Canonical and compleat yet still it is Christ alone that grants the power of Order and it is he alone that gives Jurisdiction to every Bishop in his Ordination and even in the Church of Rome the Jurisdiction of Bishops comes not from the Pope but from Christ and therefore Jurisdictio Episcopalis est Juris Divini Episcopal Jurisdiction is of Divine Right because it proceeds immediately from Christ. So that in any Ordination when no essential nor necessary condition is wanting though the Ordainer have not the power of Order yet being universally reputed a true Bishop and this defect being secret that Morally speaking no Human Industry can discover it and all concencerned in the Ordination do proceed sincerely and with a good Conscience What true Christian can frame so hard a judgment of our Great Redeemer as to deny to the Ordained the power of Order and thereby permit so great a breach in his Church which hath an immediate tendency to the utter ruine thereof when it may be so easily remedied and when neither the Ordainer nor the Ordained can in the least have any imputation of blame As to the Point of Succession mentioned in the Objection I Answer That this succession is not to be understood in a Mathematical but a Moral Sense and it is the same in Ordination as it is in all other Dogmatical points and Principles of Faith contained under the Reformation For though the Latin Church which is but one Branch of the Universal Church was Guilty of many Errors in matter of Faith and for many years swerv'd from the Doctrine and Practise of Christ and his Apostles yet this could impose no necessity upon the Successors of this Branch ever to be excluded from the hopes of Salvation For when the Erroneous Principles of the Church of Rome were sufficiently detected they might yea they ought to Reforme such abuses and to conforme themselves to the Original Doctrine and Practise of the Primitive Church which were the immediate Successors to the Apostles and so to redintegrate their Faith and for the future to regulate their Faith and Practise by that never erring Rule of the Doctrine and Practise of Christ and his Apostles And shall then the Church of Rome Object against them that they cannot prove their Succession from Christ and the Apostles Which in plain termes signifies no more then this That they have not persisted in the Errors of the Church of Rome but have imbraced a new Doctrine New indeed to them but exactly conformable to the old Doctrine which Christ left to his Church and which the Church of Rome long since deserted and so Interrupted the Continuation of Professing the True and Orthodox Principles of Christ which we by our Reformation do Reassume and chuse rather to follow Christ and his Apostles then to adhere to the False and Erroneous Principles of the Church of Rome If this be a Crime then we are Guilty Must we lye under the Imputation of Blame because we would not run headlong to utter Ruine and Damnation by adhering to the Erroneous Doctrine of Rome Must that one word of Succession startle us and be inductive to perswade us to leave Heaven and go with them to Hell for Company 's sake They have made a long continued Breach in the Church themselves and interrupted their own Succession and Must they blame us for returning to the Truth because we will not succeed them in their Errors So then our Succession in Dogmatical Points in Practise and Ordination consists in this that after a Breach made by the Latin Church we having cleerly Detected the Error have reunited our selves again to the Antient and True Professors of Christianity and detested the opposite and Erroneous Doctrine of those that had Apostated from the True Church The last Clause contained in the close of the Objection that pursuant to this Doctrine a meer Secular Layman may confer Orders is easily solved because this no way follows for in this case he could neither Ordain with a colourable Title nor with a good Conscience which are both necessary for the validity of Ordination he wants the first because he never was esteemed to have the power of Order and he himself knows certainly that he never was in Orders nor ever attempted to receive them so that in presuming to Ordain he commits a heinous Sacrilege by a gross contempt of the Holy Ghost which is inconsistent with a candid sincere and conscientious proceeding so that he wants the second also and besides in so doing he can never have a right intention to confer Orders because he is conscious that he cannot have several requisites without which he cannot Ordain I only add this General Rule That according to the present Constitution and Institution of Christ practised by the Primitive Church it is impossible to confer Priesthood validly except the Imposition of Hands be applyed as the Essential Matter and accompanyed by the words of the Bishop signifying Priesthood to be thereby conferr'd as the Essential Forme which the Church of England Religiously observeth in their Ordination for while the Bishop with other
Priests puts his Hands upon the Head of him that is to be Ordained he pronounceth this Forme Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of a Priest in the Church of God now committed unto thee by the Imposition of our Hands Whose sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose sins thou dost retain they are retained Aud be thou a faithful dispenser of the Word of God and of his Holy Sacraments in the Name of the Father c. Here are both the Essentials duely applyed and punctually observed Whereas the Church of Rome applyes neither as an Essential part and therefore their Ordination of Priests according to their own Doctrine can in no way be Valid SECT IX Consectaries drawn from the Proofes of the precedent Assertion HOw many false Aspertions and querulous Cavillations have been raised by the Jesuits and other Romanists against the Bishops of the Church of England under that frivolous pretence of their being Consecrated at the Naggs head Tavern in Cheapside by one single Bishop or at most by two and they not Canonically Elected and Consecrated in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign All which were false and Malitious Calumnies invented for no other end then to depress the Autority of the Bishops of England thereby to facilitate their access to draw Proselites from the Church of England and seduce them to their Communion Which scandalous and ungrounded Comments have been fully Answered and the Canonical Ordination and Consecration of the Bishops of England cleerly vindicated from the false Imputation of all such Detracters by that Worthy and Learned Prelate John Bramhall D. D. and late Lord Primate of Ireland But What judgment shall we frame of the Ordination of Bishops and Priests in the Church of Rome there being at present neither Pope nor Cardinal nor Bishop nor Priest but such as have been Ordained according to their new Model of Ordination we shall not need here to have recourse to frivolous and feigned Stories where such grounded Truths strike at the very Essentials of their Ordination and evince the invalidity thereof Neither can they raise a Battery of Arguments against us without destroying themselves for the Proofes of the nullity of their Ordination are grounded on their own Doctrine They all Teach That Ordination is a Sacrament Instituted by Christ. The Council of Trent hath defined it so to be as we see above Sect. 7. They all assert the Matter and Forme of all Sacraments to be determined by Divine Autority which Suarez saith is de fide See their words Sect. 6. They hold moreover that any substantial change either in Matter or Forme renders the Sacrament invalid 3 Part. Tom. 3. D. 2. S. 4. Si mutatio materiae aut formae Essentialis seu substantialis sit nullum essicitur Sacramentum saith Suarez which is the current opinion of their other Divines It is likewise certain that the matter which they use in the Collation of Priesthood is essentially and more then Specifically different from the matter which Christ Instituted and which was constantly used in Ordinations many Centuries after Christ before Ordination was new molded It is also certain that the Forme of Ordination determined by Christ and a long time in use in the Church is now utterly rejected and cast out All this being duely ponder'd we must of necessity conclude that their Ordination is invalid except some other grounded expedient can be found out and proved to uphold the validity of their Ordination which hitherto I cannot discover but wish I could But no quibbles nor quirkes nor nice distinctions can any way avail them for the matter of Fact is uncontroleable and the Doctrinal part is evidenced by their own Words and Writings which it is now too late to retract It is time therefore for them seriously to consider what expedient may be found out to reinvalidate their Ordination and to qualifie themselves so as they may be in a capacity to prevent this grand inconvenience for the future for this shakes the very foundation and renders the whole Hierarchy of their Church ruinous If there are no Priests there can be no Bishops since Episcopacy is no new Order superadded but only a farther extension of the Order and Character of Priesthood as they teach well then may the Bishops exercise their potestatem jurisdictionis but can no way exercise nor communicate to others their potestatem Ordinis for none can exercise nor confer upon another a power which he neither formally nor virtually nor radically contains in himself jure communi but their Jurisdiction they distinguish from the Order of Presbitery since divers Bishops and Cardinals in the Church of Rome are only Deacons or Subdeacons and yet their Jurisdiction is as ample and hath as great an extension as if they were Priests who commonly make use of other Suffraganean Bishops to Officiate Confirm and confer Orders in their Diocess Hence it ensues that those putative Bishops which are presumed to be Canonically indued with Presbytery and Episcopacy yet in reality are not so when they personally exercise the Functions of Episcopacy their Confirmation is void yea their very Consecration of Chrisme and other Holy Oyles is of no effect but after Consecration they retain nothing but the Natural Elements of Oyle and Balsome as they were before and so are uncapable of rendring any Spiritual Emolument to those to whom they are applyed their Imposition of Hands and Benedictions are no way available to the Confirmed no more than if they were performed by a Lay-person for where the radical power of Order is wanting none of these Spiritual and Supernatural effects can ensue And when they Officiate in Mass and attempt to Consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ and having Consecrated the Hoaste they kneel down to adore it and then elevate it and shew it to the People that they also may adore it both they themselves and many Thousands of the People do daily commit at least a Material Idolatry though it may be that Invincible Ignorance may excuse them from a Formal one for they exhibit a worship of Latria to a supposed Deity under the species of Bread when in reality no such Deity is there so as they give to the meer substance of Bread a Worship due to God alone And this is daily repeated thorough the whole extent of the Roman Jurisdiction And the same happens when any other inferior Priest Officiates for the Order of Priesthood is equally defective in them all and where there is no power of Order to qualifie them for Consecration this must of necessity be void So when they administer the Communion to the People who present themselves in hopes to receive the Body and Blood of Christ and consequently those Graces which from thence accrew to the worthy Receivers Poor Souls How are they deluded and their hopes frustrated for whereas they came full fraught withthe expectation of Spiritual and Supernatural Graces they are dismist with a bare
Power of offering Sacrifice then conferr'd upon the Ordained and nothing else And the offering of Sacrifice is the chief action of a Priest because it impowers him to Consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ which none but a Priest can do Albert. Mag. L. 6. Theolog. veritatis C. 36. Actus Presbyterorum saith Albertus Magnus est Consecrare corpus Sanguinem Christi est actus principalis Alius est consequens scilicet ligare solvere The Act of Priests is to Consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ and it is the principal Act. The other is consequent which is to Retain and Absolve which they all grant therefore they must acknowledge Priesthood to be hereby conferr'd For To what other sense can they draw those words Take Receive Accept the Power of offering Sacrifice and the Ordained comes with a full intention to Receive the Power whence there cannot be the least shadow of any other design then intending this Matter and Forme as the Essentials of Priesthood SECT VIII An Illation drawn from the Premises of the Invalidity of Ordination in the Church of England Solved THe Council of Trent seems to make no difference between Order and Ordination Trid. Sess 23. Can. 3. but confounds them together Si quis dixerit Ordinem sive Sacram Ordinationem non esse verè propriè Sacramentum à Christo Domino institutum c. Anathema sit If any one shall say That Order or Holy Ordination is not truly and properly a Sacrament Instituted by Christ c. let him be Accursed But I shall make it appear that there is a considerable difference between Order and Ordination the one is that which they call a Sacrament the other not The Order of Priesthood is a Spiritual Power whereby the Ordained is enabled and Commissioned to exercise all Priestly Functions with Autority The Ordination consists in the Essential Matter and Forme regularly and aptly applyed by the Bishop which is the Ordainer to him that is Ordained and from this Matter and Forme so applyed results in the Ordained that Spiritual Power which is properly the Order of Priesthood the Character is thereby Imprinted and the Graces accommodated to the Priestly Ministry are also conferr'd So that Order with its concomitants is the effect but Ordination is the cause That is permanent in the Ordained for terme of life this is transient and passeth away for it lasts no longer then while that power is in conferring That is the principal end intended by Christ This is the means Instituted by Christ to attain that end That is as it were a Patent or Commission which the Priest acts by this the cause either efficient or Moral which procured it wherefore these being so different from each other the Council of Trent could not intend to have them both Sacraments but that alone if any must be a Sacrament which confers the Order of Priesthood to the Ordained and also Imprints the Character c. all this is performed by Ordination not by Order for nothing can be the cause of it self Order is the effect and therefore cannot be the cause The Character and Sacramental Graces are not produced by the Order but by the Ordination so that if any be a Sacrament it must be this which being premised as evident in it self A Tenth Objection by way of Deduction is drawn from the precedent Doctrine For if the Ordination of the Church of Rome be Invalid it must of necessity draw with it the Nullity of the Church of Englands Ordination who received her Orders from the Church of Rome and cannot make out her Succession of Bishops from Christ and his Apostles without passing through the sides of the Roman Bishops who must integrate the linkes of continuation Wherefore if the Church of Rome have no true Bishops it inevitably follows that the Church of England must lye under the same Censure for one that hath no power of Order can never confer that power upon another because none can give that which he hath not Otherwise it would follow that meerly Men or Civil Magistrates might confer Orders which no Man will grant My Answer to this Objection is grounded in a Principle received by the Romanists themselves namely that where the true Essentials are regularly and orderly applyed though there be a defect in the Ordainer for want of the power of Order yet if he Ordain Cum titulo colorato bona fide the Ordination is valid Four things therefore are necessary to the Validity of Ordination conferr'd by such a Bishop First That none of the Essentials be wanting Secondly That nothing be added in the Ordination repugnant to the Essentials or destructive of their Operation Thirdly That there be in the Ordainer Titulus coloratus bona sides that is a general presumption that he is a true Bishop and that he Ordains according to his Conscience knowing nothing amiss Fourthly That he have a right Intention of conferring the Order Where these Requisites do concurre the Ordination is certainly valid The First Proof hereof is grounded upon that provident care that Christ ever had of his Church for when all the Essentials and necessary Conditions are applyed and no Moral defect to be imputed to the Ordainer nor the Ordained and no Humane prudence could ever detect that secret defect in the Ordainer it would be too severe that the Original Instituter of Ordination should refuse to the Ordained the power of Order nay in a short time it would prove destructive to the whole Church for Christ knew full well the fragility of Humane Nature and considering his infinite Wisdom and Protection of his Church would not oblige our imbecility to Moral Impossibilities or if we failed by our Natural Weakness without either sin or voluntary error would permit the utter ruine and destruction of his Church which would certainly insue if such Ordinations were not valid For I suppose the Ordainers and Ordained to proceed with a candid sincere and good Conscience and that Morally speaking have not the least suspicion of any default or want of power in the Ordainer nay he himself neither knows nor surmiseth any desiciency in his Order In this Case Should the Ordination be void and null Whom could we impute it to certainly to none but those who by their Super-inductions pretended to Correct Christ's Institutions and thereby rendred all defective But must this be so prejudicial to the Church of Christ as to involve all Posterity into the Imputation of the same Crime who were no way consenting to it nay who in due time reformed such abuses and wholly disclaimed from them No certainly our Great Redeemer is more equitable and knows who rejects his Ordinances and Institutions and who endeavors to maintain them But now since Pride Ambition or a vain Pretence to an Arbitrary Power against Divine Right or what Motive else I know not induced the Prelates of the Church of Rome to evacuate Christ's Institutions and in their
this from Infallibility As for Austerity I believe that many out of a true Motive of Piety are wrought to imbrace it But how many more are there that glory in their gross and vile habit and so are proud of their seeming Humility and in stead of holiness of life How many enormous crimes are committed within those private Walls they have their Pride Ambition and Factions one against another especially among the Female Sex For Miracles How many thousands have been cry'd up as true and afterwards decry'd when the Fallacy was detected And how many have the repute of Martyrs who in reality were Malefactors deserving death But how many Martyrs have the Romanists made in England by putting them to death meerly in odium fidei wherefore it is plain and evident that all these particulars being doubtful and uncertain no Infallibility can be hence evinced The Third Objection They whose reason and understandings are convinced of the truth of the Roman Religion are bound in conscience to believe it as the true Church of God For there is a Divine Precept still incumbent upon them which commands them not to sin therefore it commands them the necessary means to avoid sin but as they stand convinced the necessary means to avoid sin is to believe it to be the true Church of God but it cannot be that God should command Men to believe an error or that which is false therefore it is an infallible truth that the Church of Rome is the true Church of Christ for else God would command us to believe falsity and error and so God himself would be the Author of it First I Answer by retorting this Argument The Greeks for Example who hear their learned Doctors and Preachers Explicate and Preach their Doctrine of the Trinity that the Holy Ghost doth not proceed from the Father and the Son but only from the Father by the Son which they propose with so much plausibility and seeming truth that the hearers are convinced of the truth thereof as belonging to Faith in this case God commands them not to sin and consequently commands the necessary means to avoid sin which is to believe that Doctrine as an Article of Faith which notwithstanding is false and erroneous I aske the Romanists Whether in this case God commands the Greeks to believe this error and if they solve this Argument they will solve their own Secondly I Answer That in the case proposed in the Argument I admit a Precept of not sinning but I deny any Precept of believing the Church of Rome to be the true Church of God Nay such a belief upon the first appearance of truth would be a sin for such an easie belief upon ungrounded though plausible Arguments in a matter of Moment is an act of rashness and temerity which I am sure are no vertues and consequently not commanded by Gods Precept The reason is because where there are several means to attain an end though the end be under Precept yet no means in particular falls under the same Precept as in the case proposed They who seem to be convinced of the truth of the Church of Rome ought in prudence to suspend their Judgment to Read Authors that Treat of such matters to Converse with Men of Integrity Piety Knowledge and Learning and then seriously to ponder and maturely to consider the whole matter this is an act of Prudence and Discretion and consequently no sin so that the Persons in the Case proposed are not restrained to one only means of avoiding sin but may make use of any that is sit and apt in order to that end Else they must acknowledge the Protestant Church to be True and Orthodox for they who are convinced that this Church is the true Church of Christ are commanded not to sin and so to believe that the Protestant Church of England is the True Church of Christ which must be so because God cannot command us to believe an Error But you may Instance That an Infallible Church is certainly better then a Fallible one and the infinite goodness of God is such as always to determine him to do that wich is best and consequently in this case hath made his Church Infallible this being best I Answer The Principle on which this Instance is grounded is commonly rejected by the Roman Divines In 1 partem D. Thomae for though Granado a Spanish Jesuite doth fusely contend to establish a necessity in God to do always that which is best yet I have heard him earnestly impugned by other Professors of Divinity of the same order and in the same Colledge of St. Hermeingildus where Granado himself Taught it and Printed it and though he have some Sectators in this Point yet a far greater number of Doctors of several Orders Teach the contrary The case stands thus Here are two of Gods Attributes viz. his Liberty and Infinite Goodness brought in competition with each other Granado to maintain the Goodness of God detracts from his Absolute Liberty and Freedom which notwithstanding is as Essential to God as his Goodness Other Authors industrioufly contend to defend the Attribute of Goodness without prejudice of liberty for without any such fatal necessity of restraining the Omnipotent he hath an ample field wherein to display his Goodness That we have our Being is an effect of Gods Goodness that we are replenisht with all Necessaries and Conve●●…ences in this life flows from his Bounty and Goodness that we were Redeemed when we were lost in Adam was Gods great Goodness towards us that we are now furnished with all Necessary Means of Salvation proceeds from Gods Goodness and the Ineffable and Eternal Goods of Heaven which we hope for are no other then the products of Gods Infinite Goodness and Mercy Besides we are no competent Judges whether a Fallible or Infallible Church be best for the second in it self seems best to us yet the All-seeing Eye of God who perfectly comprehends all the circumstances thereof together with all the combinations and Subordinations of one thing towards another in relation to the Divine Intention it may be for ought we know that a Church liable to error All things considered may be the best Thus you see according to my intended purpose I have delivered the Substance of what I Designed in this matter Methodically and with as much Brevity as was consistent with the clear understanding of the same Wherein First I proposed several Principles and Maxims of the Roman Doctors necessary and useful for the subsequent Discourse Secondly I gave you the grounds of their pretended Infallibility without dissembling any thing of their full strength Thirdly I set down my Tenet and Proofes thereof destructive of that Infallibility And Fourthly I solved their Objections which Method I shall observe for the future and hereby we may consider upon how weak a foundation this Main Pillar of the Church of Rome is grounded whereby the whole structure becomes disjoyned and ruinous Dispute II. Of the
his Example may confirm his Admonition that he may preserve the Guift of thy Ministry pure and undefiled and may transforme by his Immaculate Benediction the Body and Brood of thy Son through the obedience of thy People that as a perfect Man with inviolable Charity to the measure of age of the fulness of Christ in the day of the Justice of Eternal Judgment he may acquit himself with a pure Conscience with a full Faith being filled with the Holy Ghost Per Dominum c. Consecration of the Hand Let these Hands be Consecrated and Sanctified by this Unction and our Benediction that whatever they Bless may be Blessed and whatever they Sanctifie may be Sanctified Per Dominum c. Another Let these Hands be Anointed with this Holy Oyle and Chrisme of Sanctification as Samuel Anointed David for a King and a Prophet so let them be Anointed and Compleated in the Name of God the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost making the Sign of the Cross of the Lord our Saviour Jesus Christ who Redeemed us from Death and brings us to the Kingdom of Heaven Hear us Pious Father Omnipotent Eternal God and perform what we entreat and pray of thee Per Dominum c. A Ritual taken out of the Fourth Council of Carthage WHere these words are contained Presbyter cum Ordinatur Episcopo eum benedicente manum super caput ejus tenente etiam omnes Presbyteri qui presentes sunt manus suas juxta manum Episcopi super caput illius teneant Another taken out of the Fourth Council of Carthage WHen a Priest is Ordained the Bishop Blessing him and holding his hand upon his head likewise all the Priests that are present shall lay their hands upon his head by the hand of the Bishop The Ritual of Gelatius Pope Written 900 years since ORdo qualiter Romana sedis Apostolicae Ecclesia Presbyteri Diaconi vel Subdiaconi eligendi sunt Mensis primi quarti septimi decimi Sabbatorum die in duodecim lectiones ad Sanctum Petrum ubi Missae celebrantur Postquam antiphonam ad introitum dixerint data oratione adnuntiat Pontifex in Populo dicens Auxiliante Domino Deo salvatore nostro Jesu Christo Iterum dicit Auxiliante Domino Deo salvatore nostro Jesu Christo eligimus in ordine Diaconi sive Presbyteri illum Diaconum sive Subdiaconum de titulo illo Si quis autem habet aliquid contra hos viros pro Deo propter Deum cum fiducia exeat dicat verumtamen memor sit communionis suae Et post modicum intervallum mox incipiunt omnes Kyrie eleison cum Letania hac expleta ascendunt ipsi electi ad sedem Pontificis benedicit cos à quo vocati sunt descendunt Stant in ordines suos benedictione percepta Sequitur oratio de bened require ipsam in quarto aut decimo mense The Ritual of Gelatius the Pope Written 900 years since THe Order how Priests Deacons Subdeacons are to be chosen in the Roman Church of the See Apostolick On the Sabbath of the First Fourth Seventh and Tenth Month at the 12 Lessons at St. Peters Church where Masses are celebrated After they have said the Antiphon to the Introitus after Prayer let the Bishop declare among the People saying Our Lord God and our Saviour Jesus Christ assisting us Again he sayes Our Lord God and our Saviour Jesus Christ assisting We chuse into the Order of Deacon or Priest that Deacon or Subdeacon of that Title If any one have any thing against these Men for Gods sake let him come forth with coufidence and speak yet let him be mindful of his Communion And after a small interval all forthwith begin Kyrie Eleison with the Letany this compleated the Persons chosen step up to the Bishops Seat and he Blesses them from whom they are called and they go down They stand in their Orders the Blessing being received Then follows a Prayer of Benediction as in the Fourth or the Tenth Month. What follows is all as above Ad Ordinandos Presbyteros Oremus dilectissimi c. the same in substance as above Then follows Consecratio Consummatio Presbyteri Item Benedictio All the same as above A Ritual of above 800 years standing This Ritual and the next were taken out of a Written Book kept in the Pontifical Chamber of the Vatican which the Pope used when he Officiated It may be seen in the Fifth Tome of St. Gregory POstquam antiphonam ad introitum dixerint data oratione venit Archidiaconus offert eum qui ordinandus est Pontifici ita dicens Postulat sanct a mater Ecclesia Catholica ut hunc praesentem diaconum ad onus Presbyterii ordinetis Interrogat Episcopus Scis illum dignum esse Respondet offerens quantum humana fragilitas nosse sinit scio testificor ipsum dignum esse ad hujus onus officii c. Tunc annnnciat Pontifex Populo Auxiliante Domino Deo c. the same as in the Ritual of Gelatius then follows Oratio ad Presbyteros Ordinandos Consecratio Hic vestis casulam Benedictio Patris filii Spiritus Sancti descendat super te ut sis benedictus in ordine sacerdotali offeras placabiles hostias pro peccatis at que offensionibus populi omnipotenti Deo cui sit honor gloria in secula seculorum Then Consecratio manus as above and nothing else A Ritual of above 800 years standing AFter they shall have said the Antiphon to the Introitus after Prayer comes the Archdeacon and presents him who is to be Ordained to the Bishop saying thus The Holy Mother the Catholick Church requires that ye Ordain this Deacon here present to the charge of Priesthood The Bishop Asks Do you know him worthy The Archdeacon Answers So far as humane frailty is suffered to know I both know and testifie him to be worthy to undergo the burden of this Office Then let the Bishop say to the People Auxiliante Domino Deo c. By the help of the Lord God c. Then the Prayer and Consecration the Priestly Vestment c. The Blessing of the Father Son and Holy Ghost descend upon thee that thou mayst be blest in the Priesthood and mayst offer acceptable Sacrifices for sins and offences of the people to Allmighty God to whom be Honor and Glory for ever and ever A Ritual taken out of a very antient Manuscript of the Vatican This contains nothing different from the former but only a word or two here and there changed without any essential difference There are Three other Rituals the one belonging to Corbie in France another is a Ritual that was used in England 800 years since and now belongs to the Church of Roane The Third belongs to the Church of Remes and was Written about 800 years since which all agree with that above There is another Ritual 700 years old This did belong to
place to substitute their own and hereby to make Ordination void so likewise is Human frailty subject to many such defects whereof some are imputable of crime to the first Authors but not to those that succeed them for I suppose these to be blinded by invincible ignorance others proceed only from the weakness and limited capacity of Human nature without any deformity or Moral defect in their wills Wherefore should the Church of God so rely upon our weak capacities that a secret and clandestine defect in an Ordainer which no vigilance nor Human precaution can avoid when all other requisites are applyed and all have an invincible ignorance of that secret defect Should this I say render all his Ordinations invalid when all other requisites are applyed then another such defect may on the same account incidently fall on another considering our weakness or Malice in the beginners and so on a third and at length no Bishop nor Priest that 's validly Ordained will be found in the Church See how this is inductive to the Churches ruine which certainly had been long-since destroyed had not the Divine Instituter thereof maintained it by supplying such defects which we can neither avoid nor prevent which he can as easily do as he first Instituted the Sacraments and Ordination for it is he alone that gives the Spiritual Order to the Ordained and to give it in these circumstances is but congruous for none concerned in such an Ordination are blameworthy and not to give it is absolutely and by common providence inevitably destructive of the whole Church which certainly the Supreme Lord thereof will not deliver up to ruine since with so much difficulty care and tenderness he Instituted it and to the same it belongs first to Institute and then to Conserve But this Doctrine seems to administer the occasion of a reply for admitting that Titulus coloratus bona fides do supply the defect of Order in the Ordainer so that one who is by all esteemed and reputed a true Bishop yet in effect by reason of some secret default is not so when all other requisites and essentials are aptly and duely applyed do validly Ordain Why then cannot this Doctrine be applied to the Roman Bishops For if they should be defective in the Power of Order yet adhibiting all essentials and other necessary conditions their Ordinations would also be valid among themselves for we cannot in Charity presume that they proceed against their Conscience or that they want that sincerity and right intention which we suppose in others This being supposed the case is the same for if the Roman Bishops validly Ordained the Bishops of the Church of England Why should not they validly Ordain their own I Answer That they Ordain their own Priests and Bishops according to the Roman Ritual and consequently they want the maine requisite which is the essential Matter and Forme for they have Innovated a Matter and Forme of their own far different from that which Christ Instituted and they cleerly signifie by that Forme that they intend thereby to confer the Order of Priesthood so that they cannot intend to Ordain by the Essential Matter and Forme derived from the Apostles if any such be contained in their Ritual except they would be reputed deluders as hath been proved at large in the Fifth Sixth and Seventh Sections of this Disputation Wherefore according to the disposition of the Roman Ritual the Essence of Ordination cannot subsist And certainly nothing can have a being without its own Essence as all must grant For the Church of Rome partly by adding their new reputed Essentials to which their intention of Ordaining must be fixed and partly by Inverting the Order have made so great a confusion that one part destroys another and particularly their Essentials do absolutely destroy the Essentials Instituted by Christ if their Liturgy contain any such and hinder their effect But when the Bishops that were Ordained in the Church of Rome had deserted their Communion and Ordained the Bishops of the Church of England they did it by the English Ritual which contains the very Essential Matter and Forme Instituted by Christ and delivered to us by the Apostles which were so duely and regularly applyed to the Ordained as was ever in practise in the antient Church so that here nothing at all was wanting that in the case proposed was necessary to the validity of Ordination Wherefore this Ordination is far different from that which the Roman Bishops use when they Ordain according to the Roman Pastoral And consequently the Ordination which the Romans use among themselves is Invalid but the Ordination of the English Bishops reteins its Integrity A Second Proofe hereof is grounded upon the practise of the Greek Church whose Ordination the Church of Rome ever approved as valid yet they always used the Imposition of hands as the Essential matter of Priesthood with this Forme Divina Gratia quae semper infirma sanat deficientia complet promovet hunc Deo amabilem Diaconum in Presbyterum The Divine Grace that always cures that which is infirme and compleats that which is deficient promotes this pious Deacon to Priesthood Consider here what precaution the Greeks used in the Essential Forme of their Ordination for knowing how prone we are all to errors and mistakes they in a matter of such high concern have recourse to the Author of Grace to confirm and strengthen that which by Human Frailty might be weak and unstable as also to compleat the defects and supply the wants of their Ordination in case any thing else should be necessary not known to them And hereby they used their best endeavors to prevent the nullity of their Ordinations which might proceed from their own weakness or inadvertency as not being ignorant how many errors and mistakes we are subject to notwithstanding the best of our endeavors to the contrary Which implyes a confidence in them that using the true Essentials and a right intention Christ would supply all other secret defects whereof the want of the power of Order in the Ordainer is one especially when he is generally reputed by all and by himself also a true Bishop For as it is above observed in the beginning of this Section the Power of Order in the Ordained is no Essential part of Ordination but meerly the effect thereof so that the Ordination is Essentially and Specifically compleat without it and because Ordination is Instituted by Christ as a means to determine him to confer this Spiritual Power upon the Ordained How reasonable and congruous is it that the cause being compleat the effect should not be wanting especially since it exceeds our capacity to discover the defect For when a cause is hinder'd from producing his effect either by contrary agents or by the indisposition of the Medium or by the incapacity of the Passum we cannot thence infer that the agent is incompleat or wants vertue quantum est ex se for as much
late to make any change or alteration in it or any way to repeal or abrogate it So they may talke of an indirect power of degrading the contract and depriving it of its wonted obligation and making it no civil contract but all in vain for Christ's Institution must stand Yet it may be Reply'd That those clandestine contracts which were to be after the Decree of the Council are no civil contracts and therefore not comprehended under the number of those that Christ Instituted as Sacraments I Answer That the Supreame Legislator in the Institution of Sacraments did not regulate himself by any subsequent and human Law made in prejudice of his Institution but well knowing those Clandestine Contracts to be of their own nature obligatory he confirm'd that mutual obligation in them by erecting them to the dignity of Sacraments which no human Decree can change for otherwise the Councils might prescribe him what Rules they pleased to regulate his proceeding The Second Objection Since we are destitute of any certain knowledge what those Contracts were that Christ Instituted as Sacraments we ought in this to take the testimony of the Church for the Rule of our Belief who by reason of her Infallibility is best able to informe us and secure us from Error Wherefore since the Church declares all succeeding Clandestine Contracts to be no Sacraments nor Civil Contracts we have no reason by our own fallible discourse to call in question the verity of the Churches Declaration I Answer That the Church of Rome not only declares those subsequent contracts to be void but as much as in her lies makes them so Prout eos presenti decreto irritos facit annullat which notwithstanding before this Decree were valid and obligatory As for the Church of Romes Infallibility we have in the precedent Disputation examin'd it and found it defective and shall hereafter prove it erroneous and therefore have no grounds to confide in it But in this case we have made it appear that the determination of those Contracts which of their own nature were Obligatory was made by Divine Institution and that such Contracts were deputed to be Sacraments long before this Decree of the Council yea and are still reputed Sacraments inducing a mutual obligation here in England and other places where the Council of Trent was never received which the Church of Rome acknowledges How then could this subsequent Decree of the Council have any influence upon those contracts which were establisht as valid and indued with a Sacramental vertue by a Divine Decree that was precedent to this human Decree of the Council This being but a fruitless attempt to render that invalid which was constituted as valid Jure Divino The Third Objection Clandestine Marriage was ever hold unlawful and therefore they who contract so commit a sin in doing it because they transgress against a precept of their lawful Superiors and it is not likely that Christ would affix his Supernatural Graces to a sinful action nay it is impossible that a Mortal sin and Grace can stand together in the same subject And therefore the Church might prudently presume that such sinful contracts were not Instituted by Christ as Sacraments First I Answer That the Romanists themselves must solve this Objection for they all grant that clandestine Marriages were Sacraments and valid contracts ever before the Council of Trent and are so still in England and Saxony and yet they ever were and still are unlawful which circumstance they must reconcile with Christ's Institution for notwithstanding the sin they acknowledge them to have been Instituted by Christ as Sacraments But Secondly I Answer That the circumstance of contracting clandestinely is wholly extrinsecal to the contract and therefore can never alter the nature nor essence of it for circumstances make no change in the substance and this is common to all Sacraments for whoever receives any Sacrament may out of the pravity of his own will add some unlawful circumstance to it or receive it when his Soul is contaminated with sin but we must not hence conclude that this deordinate proceeding of the Receiver layes any infection upon the Sacrament whose compleat substance and essence is wholly independant of the circumstances which are extrinsecal to it True it is that all Sacraments produce Grace as also that Grace and deadly sin are wholly inconsistent and therefore whosoever receives a Sacrament when he is actually in sin puts an Obstacle to the effect of the Sacrament and cannot then receive any Grace by it because sin makes him liable to the pains of Hell and Grace gives him whose Soul it informs a right to Glory and because these two are incompatible therefore Grace and Sin that are the necessary causes of them mutually exclude each other from the same Soul Yet they generally Teach in the Church of Rome That when the obstacle is removed and the Soul purged from sin that then the Sacrament revives and produceth that Grace which by the original Institution was annexed to it and this Doctrine they also apply to Moral actions in reference to Inherent and Sanctifying Grace which they Merit for when one falleth into sin he loseth all that habitual Grace which he possest before his fall it being inconsistent with sin but when he is again restored to the state of Grace then his Merits revive to render him the same quantity of Sanctifying Grace which he before had lost by sin So is it in those that contract clandestine Marriage if invincible ignorance doth not excuse them they sin and receive no Inherent and Sanctifying Grace till sin which is the obstacle be removed and in the same moment that this is done the Sacrament revives and produceth in their Souls its due proportion of habitual and inherent Grace See Suarez Opuscul 5. D. 2. S. 2. 3. And thus have I vindicated the Validity of Clandestine Marriage against the Church of Rome by the Principles of their own Doctors and consequently that Decree of the Council of Trent is but a vain attempt to render that void which by Divine Autority is establisht as valid which proceeding is originally drawn from a presumption of their pretended Infallibility And therefore whatsoever they decree though against Divine Right is held as Sacred and not liable to error as in this case it happens But this is certain that these private Matrimonial Contracts were by Christ appointed as Sacraments or they were not if not then the Church of Rome erred by ever acknowledging them as such if they were then the Council of Trent errs by endeavoring to repeal them You 'l say That those Contracts that proceeded the Council were Instituted by Christ because they were civil contracts but they which succeeded were not because they were no Civil contracts Yes because the Council will have it so But Who sees not that according to this Doctrine it is the Council and not Christ that is the proper Instituter of this Sacrament for the
Heresie He was of the most eminent repute of his time He was a great Opponent of all Novelty and Innovation and for his Merits very dear to the Emperor These then were the Persons which the Emperor consulted and required them to give him in Writing the True Sense of the Church concerning the Body of Christ in the Eucharist Whether it were contained in the Sacrament in Verity and Reality or only in Vertue and Figure as also whether it were the same Body of Christ that was born of the Virgin Mary Suffered upon the Cross Rose from the Dead c. that we receive in the Sacrament for to both Questions Paschasius Answers That it was the same Body present in the Eucharist in Verity and Reality and not only in Vertue and Figure To these two Questions the forenamed Doctors gave in their Answer in Latin to the Emperor in Writing and their Resolutions were contrary to the Doctrine of Paschasius as to both Questions For to the First Whether that which we receive in the Sacrament of the Eucharist be truly and really the Body of Christ or only a Figure and Type thereof They both Answer That the Body and Blood of Christ are contained in this Sacrament only in Figure and Virtue and not in Reality As to the Second Question Whether it be the same Body that was Born of the Virgin Mary that suffered on the Cross that was Buried and Rose again that Ascended into Heaven they Answer That we Receive the Figure and Verture of that same Body And not wholly to omit the Transactions of these two Doctors I shall here briefly relate some passages of each of them SECT VI. A briefe account of some passages of the life and death of John Erigène THis Learned Doctor how dear soever he was to that Great Emperor Charles yet he was sharply censur'd and severely handled by several Authors and great Prelates and especially by the Council of Valentia for some Dogmatical Points which he deliver'd in a Treatise that he Wrote of Predestination and the state of the future Life as deviating from the Orthodox Principles of the Church yet none reprehended him for his Doctrine of the Eucharist And certainly he meritted eternal renown for Translating the Hierarchy of Dionysius of Areopagyta from Greek into Latin by Command of the Emperor Charles which Work added no small access to the Opinion formerly conceived of his zeal and eloquence for hence he was esteemed a Saint and that his Doctrine and knowledge was infus'd from Heaven His Fame daily increasing he was at last called into England by Alfrede then King where he was Barbarously Murdered by his own Disciples in the Monastery of Malmesbury in the year 883 or thereabouts and was decently buried in that Church but his Body was afterwards with great Pomp and Magnificence translated to the Cathedral and there placed before the Altar with this Epitaph Here lies John the Holy Philosopher Gulielm Malmesb. L. 2. C. 5. who in his life time was inriched with wonderful Doctrine and in the end had the honor to ascend by Martyrdom to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ where the Saints reign eternally as William of Malmesbury relates And after his decease by the Autority of the See of Rome he was put into the Catalogue of Martyrs His Treatise of the Eucharist remained extant about 200 years after he Wrote it by the Emperors Command but about the year 1050 it was read in the Council of Verceils where Pope Leo the Ninth presided and there condemned to be Burnt as being repugnant to the Orthodox Doctrine of the Eucharist which was accordingly put in execution and so this Treatise perish'd And consequently it was often moved to have him expunged from the Catalogue of Saints but without effect till the time of Baronius who alledging That he had Written against the Real Presence upon this account got him excluded from that rank wherein he had been formerly placed by Gregory the 13th and other Popes Histor Ecclesiast Angliae L. 2. P. 119. as Fuller relates SECT VII Some Passages of the Life and Doctrine of Retram THis Doctor was one of the Learnedst and of the fairest repute of his time and upon this account was chosen among the rest by Charles the Emperor together with John Scot or Erigéne to give him an account what was the true meaning of Christ's Word 's and the true Doctrine of the Church in relation to the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist By this means to allay the heat of that turbulent Contention and Animosity which had reacht the utmost confines of his Dominions and dissected his Subjects into violent Factions occasioned by the Writings of Paschasius wherein he Asserted the Real Presence These two great Men in Complyance to the Emperors Command gave their Answer in two distinct Treatises in Latin upon this Subject wherein they both agreed that the true Orthodox Doctrine never admitted of any Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament but that it was there contained Virtually and Figuratively by means of Christ's Institution which they proved out of the Scripture and Fathers alleging several parallel examples out of Holy Writ concluding that the adverse Opinion was a Heterodox novelty contrary to Scripture Fathers and the Universal Belief of the Church till that time Retram when he Wrote this Treatise was a Priest of the Church of Rome and Monck of the Monastery of Corby soon after there arose great difficulties between Nicholas the First then Pope and Photius Patriarch of Constantinople whereupon Pope Nicholas implores the Assistance of the Bishops of France to defend the Latin Church against the Greeks The Clergy of the Gallican Church knew not where to find a more able and expert Champion to carry on this great design then Bertram or Retram and so unanimously chose him to defend the Pope and the Latin Church against their Antagonists Retram undertakes it and discharges his trust with a great deal of honor and applause and was afterwards created Abbot of Orbais But to come to his Doctrine his Treatise of the Body and Blood of Christ was providently preserved and at length Translated into English and Printed here in England about a Hundred Thirty and two years since in the year of our Lord 1549 whereof there have been several Editions since and it was lately Printed in France both in Latin and French But now come we to give you a Specimen of the Tenets which by this Treatise he endeavors to establish First Then he tells us That the Bread which by the Mystery of the Priest is made the Body of Christ doth shew one thing to the External Senses and another thing soundeth inwardly to the Mind of Faith Outwardly the Bread remaineth as it was before c. and then he adds of the VVine The Wine also which by the Consecration of the Priest is made the Sacrament of the Blood of Christ
and the First Man Adam which were Created free fell from the happy State they were Created in by the perverse use of their Free-wills Who then shall dare presume to asperse the Last Work of the Incarnate Word with any Pretended Imperfection and render it Heterogeneal from the rest For he is the same Omnipotent God that Created all those things mentioned and his Power is not Abridg'd nor his Will Chang'd for he is Essentially uncapable of any Error Mutation or Imperfection It remains therefore that the Opinion of Paschasius Teaching the Real Existence of Christ's Body and Blood in the Eucharist was a New Heterodox and Erroneous Doctrine discrepating from the constant Belief of the Church from the begining till that time And hence is evinced the falsity of that Erroneous Doctrine that asserts the Literal and Oral Manducation of Christ's Glorisied Body in the Communion for if that Glorified Body be not Actually Really Physically and Locally present in the Eucharist then the Receiver cannot exercise any such Oral Manducation of it Wherefore this Position is repugnant to Autority of Scripture and Fathers it is against Antiquity and Reason The Church of Rome was once Immaculate and retain'd its Original Innocency for many years But as the Angels though perfect in their Creation yet by their Swelling Thoughts Aspired to Sublimer Prerogatives not allowed to their Limited Perfections fell from that happy State of their Primitive Creation so the Church of Rome when many high and Soaring Spirits met together in Councils Relying upon their Pretended Infallibility Usurpt a Power of Swaying all things belonging to the Church and Religion according to their own fancy then they began to Abrogate some things of Christ's Institution and Superinduce others of their own they made several Commutations and Reformations exceeding the limits of their Power as hath been proved in this Treatise So that now their Church is like a confus'd Chaos retaining some things of Christ's Institution commixt with others of their own Human Invention and so have lost that Purity and Perfection which once they enjoy'd And which the Protestant Church of England still retains in its Primitive and Original Purity and Integrity And here I close up this Discourse of Religion wherein whatsoever I have delivered I humbly submit to the Censure and Correction of those upon whom it is incumbent to Regulate the Belief and Practise of the Protestant Church of England AN INDEX OF THE Disputations and Sections Dispute I. Of the Pretended Infallibility of the Church of Rome SEct. I. Wherein consists the true Notion of Infallibility Sect. II. The Grounds of the Pretended Infallibility of the Church of Rome are proposed Sect. III. The Decision of the Present Controversie Sect. IV. An Answer to the Objections proposed against the Nullity of the Church of Rome's Infallibility Dispute II. Of the Intrenchments of the Church of Rome upon Divine Right by Changing the Essentials of their Pretended Sacraments SEct. I. The Doctrine of the Church of Rome relating to this present Controversie Sect. II. The Practise of Antiquity in the Collation of Priesthood Sect. III. A brief account of the Rituals of the Greeks Maronites c. Sect. IV. Shewing that the Church of Rome placeth the Essence of the Ordination of Priests in touching the Vessels and the Forme annexed to it Sect. V. The Order of Priesthood according to the present Institution cannot be validly conferr'd by touching the Vessels with this Forme Accipe potestatem c. Sect. VI. An Answer to the Objections proposed by the Divines of the Church of Rome against the Invalidity of their Ordination Sect. VII The Solution of other Objections against the same Doctrine Sect. VIII An Illation drawn from the Premises of the Invalidity of Ordination in the Church of England solved Sect. IX Consectaries drawn from the Proofes of the precedent assertion Sect. X. Of Clandestine Marriage Sect. II. The Arguments to vindicate the Nullity of Clandestine Marriage Answered Dispute III. Of Communion in one Kind SEct. I. The Grounds of the Church of Rome for denying the Chalice to the Laity Sect. II. The Decision of this Controversie Sect. III. The Objections Solved Sect. IV. Corallaries drawn from the Romanists Doctrine of their pretended Sacrifice of the Mass Dispute IV. Of Transubstantiation SEct. I. The Romanists Doctrine relating to Transubstantiation Sect. II. The Orthodox Doctrine against Transubstantiation proposed and proved Sect. III. Of the possibility of Transubstantiation as held by the Church of Rome Sect. IV. Objections for Transubstantiation solved Dispute V. Of the Real Presence SEct. I. The Church of Romes Definitions concerning the Real Presence Sect. II. Other Subtilties arising from the former Decisions not fully determin'd Sect. III. The Inutility of multiplying Definitions of this Nature Sect. IV. The Objections Solved Sect. V. When and from whom this Doctrine of the Real Presence took its first rise Sect. VI. A Briefe Account of some passages of the Life and Death of John Erigene Sect. VII Some Passages of the Life and Doctrine of Retram Sect. VIII An Account of the Doctrine of Retram in reference to the Second Question Sect. IX Animadversions on the Premises FINIS